RE: [asa] CDESIGN PROPONETSISTS

Not to mention that if this copying error did make it to bumper stickers and
further into the media and press, we would have a perfect analog of the
evidence for common descent. Imagine trying to explain the design value of
that.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Jack
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 8:06 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: [asa] CDESIGN PROPONETSISTS

I do not know if this is old news or not, but did anyone see Nova last
night? It was a short documentary about the Dover trial.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

It is worth watching if and when they broadcast it again.

One of the more illuminating and ironic segments regarded the different
drafts of Pandas and People. The lawyers for the plaintiff were trying to
prove that ID was just a repackaging of what had previously been called
creationism. One of the pieces of evidence was text from comparing pre and
post Edwards editions of Pandas and People. After the Edwards decision the
editors wanted to take "creationism" out of the book. One of the witnesses
for the plaintiff found a couple of example where creationism/creator was
changed to ID/design, with otherise identical wording. But the most
humorous and ironic example was an attempt to remove the word creationist
with the words design proponents. But something went wrong in the editing,
and the actual wording in the post-Edwards draft was cdesign proponentsists.
So, unkowingly, they created a "transitional form", and clear evidence that
the authors of Pandas equate ID with creationism.

I had never heard that little detail before, and thought it was worth
mentioning here.

I think CDESIGN PROPONETSISTS would make a great bumper sticker.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 14 08:21:33 2007